Digital Pathology During the COVID-19 Outbreak in Italy: Survey Study.

BACKGROUND: Transition to digital pathology usually takes months or years to be completed. We were familiarizing ourselves with digital pathology solutions at the time when the COVID-19 outbreak forced us to embark on an abrupt transition to digital pathology. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to quantitatively describe how the abrupt transition to digital pathology might affect the quality of diagnoses, model possible causes by probabilistic modeling, and qualitatively gauge the perception of this abrupt transition. METHODS: A total of 17 pathologists and residents participated in this study; these participants reviewed 25 additional test cases from the archives and completed a final psychologic survey. For each case, participants performed several different diagnostic tasks, and their results were recorded and compared with the original diagnoses performed using the gold standard method (ie, conventional microscopy). We performed Bayesian data analysis with probabilistic modeling. RESULTS: The overall analysis, comprising 1345 different items, resulted in a 9% (117/1345) error rate in using digital slides. The task of differentiating a neoplastic process from a nonneoplastic one accounted for an error rate of 10.7% (42/392), whereas the distinction of a malignant process from a benign one accounted for an error rate of 4.2% (11/258). Apart from residents, senior pathologists generated most discrepancies (7.9%, 13/164). Our model showed that these differences among career levels persisted even after adjusting for other factors. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings are in line with previous findings, emphasizing that the duration of transition (ie, lengthy or abrupt) might not influence the diagnostic performance. Moreover, our findings highlight that senior pathologists may be limited by a digital gap, which may negatively affect their performance with digital pathology. These results can guide the process of digital transition in the field of pathology.

PRAME Immunoexpression in 275 Cutaneous Melanocytic Lesions: A Double Institutional Experience.

In recent years, the preferentially expressed antigen in melanoma (PRAME) has also been used in the histopathological diagnosis of melanocytic lesions, in order to understand if it could constitute a valid, inexpensive, and useful resource in dermatopathological fields. We performed a double-center study to evaluate whether the data on the usefulness and possible limitations of PRAME could also be confirmed by our group. From 1 December 2021 to 29 March 2022, we collected 275 cases of melanocytic lesions that were immunostained with PRAME (Ab219650) and rabbit monoclonal antibody (Abcam). To better correlate the PRAME expression with its nature (benign, uncertain potential for malignancy, or malignant), we categorized PRAME tumor cells' percentage positivity and intensity of immunostaining in a cumulative score obtained by adding the quartile of positive tumor cells (0, 1+, 2+, 3+, 4+) to the PRAME expression intensity in tumor cells (0, 1+, 2+, 3+). Of these 275 lesions, 136 were benign, 12 were of uncertain potential for malignancy (MELTUMP or SAMPUS or SPARK nevus), and 127 were malignant. The immunoexpression of PRAME was completely negative in 125/136 benign lesions (91.9%), with only a few positive melanocytes (1+) and intensity 1+ in the remaining 11 cases (8.1%). Of the 127 cases of melanoma (superficial spreading, lentigo maligna, and pagetoid histotypes), PRAME was strongly positive in 104/127 cases (81.8%) with intensity 4+ and 3+. In 17 cases (13.3%; melanoma spindle and nevoid cell histotypes), PRAME was positive in percentage 2+ and with intensity ranging from 2+ to 3+. In 7 cases (5.5%) of desmoplastic melanoma, PRAME was 1+ positive and/or completely negative. Of the 12 cases of lesions with uncertain potential for malignancy, the immunoexpression of PRAME was much more heterogeneous and irregularly distributed throughout the lesion. These data are perfectly in agreement with the current literature, and they demonstrate that the reliability of PRAME is quite high, but its use cannot cause physicians to disregard the morphological information and the execution of other ancillary immunohistochemical stains such as Melan-A, HMB-45, MiTF, and SOX-10.

How Are We Facing It? Dispatches From Pathology Residents in a COVID-19 Lombardy Hospital.

At the end of February, the Italian National Health Service reported a hot spot of Coronavirus disease in the Lombardy region. COVID-19 is a highly pathogenic viral infection which poses some challenges for healthcare workers. Indeed, Pathology Departments are involved in reorganizing samples' management, from their delivery until their processing, according to National and WHO guidelines. Since Lombardy has been declared COVID-19 hot spot, due to decreasing number of surgical procedures, our Department adopted a policy to reduce personnel, allowing pathologists to work remotely during the outbreak. Lacking clear information about viral load on tissue samples, all human specimens must be considered potentially infectious, as well as patients during post-mortem examinations, and clinical information on COVID-19 status is mandatory. It is also important that Pathology staff receive an adequate training, and adherence to rules should be always accompanied by common sense.